JoseCuervo
New member
Wolf advocates offer to pick up the tab ... Programs to compensate ranchers' losses get mixed reviews
By Michelle Dunlop
Times-News writer
BOISE -- Ten years ago, Suzanne Stone found herself right in the thick of wolf reintroduction.
"It was like seeing a dream come true," she said.
Stone's personal interest in wolves led to her involvement in wolf recovery. Over the years, Stone has played various roles -- from monitoring public opinion for the Wolf Education and Research Center to her current position as a spokeswoman for Defenders of Wildlife, an organization that works to protect wild animals and their habitats.
"I've just always been fascinated by wolves," she said. "I got into it because I love wolves.
"It's been my life."
Stone remembers how thick the layer of misconception among the public was during the early years of wolf recovery. She believes those attitudes have changed over time.
"I think I hear people talk about accepting that wolves are here," Stone said.
In fact, one of the things that has added to that level of acceptance -- livestock producers in particular -- is a compensation program provided by Defenders of Wildlife. Even before the first wolves were reintroduced, it became apparent that one of the major controversies of the species recovery would be livestock losses due to wolf predation. Defenders instituted a mechanism to ease that controversy and encourage a greater tolerance for wolves -- a reimbursement program for livestock producers. Today, the state of Idaho administers a complementary program to further promote acceptance.
Defenders established its reimbursement program in 1987. The plan pays market value up for livestock killed by wolves. Livestock owners receive up to $2,000 for confirmed wolf kills and 50 percent of market value for probable kills. Since 1987, Defenders has paid almost $430,000 in compensation.
Defenders additionally established the Proactive Carnivore Conservation Fund, which helps pay for proactive measures to reduce wolf-livestock conflict. The organization helps fund such things as guard dogs used to protect livestock herds, electric corrals to keep wolves out, and studies that examine practices that discourage wolves. Defenders also pays for ranchers to utilize alternate grazing areas for livestock.
"We started seeing links as to what was attracting wolves," Stone said.
Proactive efforts have been initiated by both ranchers and the Defenders organization, she said.
Are livestock producers satisfied with the compensation they receive? According to the organization's surveys, about 70 percent of producers say they are "definitely satisfied;" roughly 12 percent remain dissatisfied. Not receiving compensation for missing livestock stands as a major source of their discontent, Stone said.
"A lot of these deaths get attributed to wolves that really aren't," she said. "It doesn't mean that we're catching all of them."
Rancher and former Idaho Cattle Association president Dave Nelson doesn't view Defenders' program in quite the same light as Stone.
"The Defenders' plan is probably not too good," Nelson said.
The problem, Nelson said, lies in the probable and missing category. Studies have shown that "for every calf you find dead, there's probably five or six lost," Nelson said.
Weiser livestock producer Margaret Soulen Hinson hasn't received compensation for all of her missing sheep. However, Soulen Hinson says, the organization has been good to work with, providing funding for extra equipment for her sheepherders when dealing with wolves.
Retired state Sen. Laird Noh, R-Kimberly, worries about what will happen to livestock producers who have grown accustomed to being compensated by Defenders if the program goes away.
"I don't like it in principle," Noh said. "They don't really have a responsibility here."
However, Noh credits the Defenders compensation plan with making the idea of reintroduction a little easier for livestock producers to digest earlier on.
"It's helped a lot of ranchers," Noh said. "It's helped smooth the way for reintroduction."
One wolf advocacy group, Western Watersheds, dislikes the Defenders program for entirely different reasons. The group feels it's unproductive for environmental groups to help ranchers.
"We're not primarily interested in working with ranchers," said Jon Marvel, executive director. "There's no evidence that the Defenders' compensation program has changed the attitude of ranchers toward wolves.
"Ranchers are big crybabies."
There could be an even bigger reason to cry if Defenders discontinues its program when delisting occurs. Stone isn't sure the organization will compensate ranchers for their losses after delisting.
"We're asking them to help evaluate the compensation program," Stone said. "Almost 90 percent said 'yes,' they want compensation to continue."
Defenders intends to place greater emphasis on its proactive/nonlethal programs. The group hopes to find ways to minimize conflicts between livestock and wolves.
The state also offers a compensation program through the Office of Species Conservation. However, while the state administers the program, funding comes from the federal government.
"This is a species of national importance," said James Caswell, director for the office. "We didn't want it. They brought it to us. If the federal government is going to bring it to us over our objections, then they need to pay for it."
Unlike Defenders' program, which precedes reintroduction, the state's program began only two years ago. Livestock producers can ask the state to compensate them for losses unaccounted for by the Defenders of Wildlife program.
Noh doubts that federal funding for the state's compensation program will continue once wolves are delisted.
"Hopefully there will be less need for it," he said.
That's why, Noh said, there has been talk of establishing a kind of trust fund to help states deal with Endangered Species Act issues. The state administered insurance program for livestock and agricultural producers may provide relief in the future for producers affected by wolf depredations, Noh said. The real hope, Noh said, lies in wolf management.
Nelson doubts that either the state's or the Defenders' plan will last. However, Nelson, like Noh, isn't putting his faith in compensation programs.
"We're not really worried about compensation," Nelson said. "We're not interested in compensation ... We want the wolves managed."